292d
2 edits
@Rajk999 said[Malachi 1:2-3 NKJV] 2 "I have loved you," says the LORD. "Yet you say, 'In what way have You loved us?' [Was] not Esau Jacob's brother?" Says the LORD. "Yet Jacob I have loved; 3 But Esau I have hated, And laid waste his mountains and his heritage For the jackals of the wilderness."
Yes, and he often takes these passages literally without checking into the original Greek words used. These days that is very easy to do. It took me a few seconds to pull up that information.
Anyway here is a further complication to KJs interpretation. Jesus said that you need to hate [the same Greek word [miseo] used in the John passage] your parents, spouse, brothers, ...[text shortened]... railed. They are not after the truth. Instead they seek to use the bible to justify their doctrine.
[Romans 9:13 NKJV] 13 As it is written, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated."
291d
@KellyJay saidOf course it is a matter of translation. The orignal texts were not in English and had jo punctiation.
It isn't a matter of translation:
1 John 4:20
New International Version
Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.
New Living Translation
If someone says, “I love God,” but hates a fellow believer, that person is a liar; for if ...[text shortened]... is not loving his brother whom he hath seen, God -- whom he hath not seen -- how is he able to love?
291d
@shavixmir saidThe original was not in English either, you have a point?
Of course it is a matter of translation. The orignal texts were not in English and had jo punctiation.
291d
@shavixmir saidWell, all of the originals were copied into several different languages and spread around the world during the time the originals were written. That is how we know what the originals said, due to the large number of translations that we could compare that were written at different times in different places.
Yes. You wrote "No translation".
It is per definition a translation.
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4282
291d
The proverbial saying, "lost in translation." The purity is lost in any translation, whether it be in languages, or in understanding. It is heavily contaminated when both come in to play.
Proverbs 30:5-6
Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
We are in dire straits when God's communication is not pure and crystal clear.
290d
@PettyTalk saidHaving thousands of copies, in different languages, found all around the world, all looked at that are saying the same thing, so where there are slight changes in how thoughts are displayed as there are bound to be there can be weeded out so that the main thrust of meaning in the text can be found.
The proverbial saying, "lost in translation." The purity is lost in any translation, whether it be in languages, or in understanding. It is heavily contaminated when both come in to play.
Proverbs 30:5-6
Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
We are ...[text shortened]... God's communication is not pure and crystal clear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0Kxw6efo5E
- Joined
- 14 Jan 19
- Moves
- 4282
290d
@KellyJay saidThe dilemma is that no one has the originals, and therefore all translations are mere translations of a previous translation. Unfortunately, what we have is the same as in Evolution theory, because we do not have the missing link. Biblically, the link to the Original Word, and for Evolution, the missing link to the origin of the species.
Having thousands of copies, in different languages, found all around the world, all looked at that are saying the same thing, so where there are slight changes in how thoughts are displayed as there are bound to be there can be weeded out so that the main thrust of meaning in the text can be found.
And if we don't have the Beginning, we won't have the Ending.
@PettyTalk saidIf you have thousands of copies of the same document written at different times, in different places, in different languages, by different people that is far more reliable than a document that people say was the original.
The dilemma is that no one has the originals, and therefore all translations are mere translations of a previous translation. Unfortunately, what we have is the same as in Evolution theory, because we do not have the missing link. Biblically, the link to the Original Word, and for Evolution, the missing link to the origin of the species.
And if we don't have the Beginning, we won't have the Ending.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WSulenOUb0
